PYC136@uriacc.uri.edu (Andy Patrizio) (01/31/91)
Howdy all. Question time. I recently purchased at Accex 2400 baud modem for the theftful price of $79. Love them computer fairs. Anyway, I've noticed it seems to have a problem I've never had with previous modems, although I think it could be a software problem. When I dial a BBS, especially from JRComm's menu, it frequently will connect, and immediately drop the High Speed connection. The light goes off as soon as the modem connects, and all I get is garbage streaming across my screen. It hangs up ok, and atz resets the modem. Also, it has a habit of scrolling incredably slow from the bottom of the screen. If I clear the scree,. it scrolls nice and fast. Once it hits the bottom of the screen, it scrolls up so painfully slow you'd think I was at 300 baud, not 2400. These problems only seem to exist with JRComm. Access 1.4.2 works ok, from what I've seen. I haven't been able to play around enough to say it never has these flaws. I'll leave a follow-up if I do have the problem. Thing is, JRComm has more than a few features I need; Zmodem, good macros, and other bennies. I'd hate to think it's the software, although we know JRComm can be flaky. SO, any theories? .signed, ----- | Bitnet: pyc136@uriacc.bitnet Andy Patrizio | ARPA: pyc136@uriacc.uri.edu Class of 2010 | Internet: pyc136%uriacc.bitnet@brownvm.brown.edu University of RI | Usenet: andypo@idsvax.ids.com | UUCP: uunet!rayssd!idsvax!andypo ----- "With friends like these, who needs hallucinations?" - Buddy, "Night Court" -----
jprad@faatcrl.UUCP (Jack Radigan) (02/01/91)
PYC136@uriacc.uri.edu (Andy Patrizio) writes: >I recently purchased at Accex 2400 baud modem for the theftful price of $79. >Love them computer fairs. Anyway, I've noticed it seems to have a problem >I've never had with previous modems, although I think it could be a software >problem. >When I dial a BBS, especially from JRComm's menu, it frequently will connect, >and immediately drop the High Speed connection. The light goes off as soon as >the modem connects, and all I get is garbage streaming across my screen. >It hangs up ok, and atz resets the modem. I assume that in this case, high speed means 2400bps, right? If you set JR-Comm to 2400 and dial the BBS manually, what happens? If the connection proceeds correctly, I'd say that the modem is not configured to return extended result codes but JR-Comm is set to auto-baud. Read the manual for details on this if it turns out that this is the problem. >Also, it has a habit of scrolling incredably slow from the bottom of the >screen. If I clear the scree,. it scrolls nice and fast. Once it hits the >bottom of the screen, it scrolls up so painfully slow you'd think I was at >300 baud, not 2400. Try using an 8 color screen instead. A 16 color screen is very slow when there is no true fast ram present for JR-Comm to run in. >Thing is, JRComm has more than a few features I need; Zmodem, good macros, >and other bennies. I'd hate to think it's the software, although we know >JRComm can be flaky. SO, any theories? Flakey? nah... -jack-
t22918@ursa (Matt Ranney ) (02/01/91)
jprad@faatcrl.UUCP (Jack Radigan) writes: >>Thing is, JRComm has more than a few features I need; Zmodem, good macros, >>and other bennies. I'd hate to think it's the software, although we know >>JRComm can be flaky. SO, any theories? > Flakey? nah... Will, _I_ for one, wouldn't call it flakey, but I'm not sure what word I would use. Overfeatured? Huge? It's a fine piece of work, don't get me wrong, but when you only have a meg of mem, using up half of it just to DL some stuff in the background is kinda expensive. But you can't design a different version for every user out there, so I guess I'll just have to live with it (or buy more mem). -- Matt Ranney t22918@ursa.calvin.edu
manes@vger.nsu.edu ((Mark D. Manes), Norfolk State University) (02/01/91)
In article <t22918.665363459@ursa>, t22918@ursa (Matt Ranney ) writes: > jprad@faatcrl.UUCP (Jack Radigan) writes: > >>>Thing is, JRComm has more than a few features I need; Zmodem, good macros, >>>and other bennies. I'd hate to think it's the software, although we know >>>JRComm can be flaky. SO, any theories? > >> Flakey? nah... > > Will, _I_ for one, wouldn't call it flakey, but I'm not sure what word I > would use. Overfeatured? Huge? It's a fine piece of work, don't get me > wrong, but when you only have a meg of mem, using up half of it just to > DL some stuff in the background is kinda expensive. But you can't design > a different version for every user out there, so I guess I'll just have to > live with it (or buy more mem). > Ack! Matt buy a memory upgrade! I am _tired_ of software being held back by the 512k whiners. Jack please go ahead an add a few more features to JR-Comm. For example scripting and a built in BBS emulator. I would love to see a editable review buffer as well. We need a _Full_ featured terminal program. I grow tired of the anemic terminal software that exists for the Amiga. I use Jr-Comm almost exclusively unless I really need to do some kermit transfers. > -- > Matt Ranney > t22918@ursa.calvin.edu -mark= +--------+ ================================================== | \/ | Mark D. Manes "Mr. AmigaVision" | /\ \/ | manes@vger.nsu.edu | / | (804) 683-2532 "Make up your own mind! - AMIGA" +--------+ ==================================================
m0154@tnc.UUCP (GUY GARNETT) (02/05/91)
In article <578.27a92c1b@vger.nsu.edu> manes@vger.nsu.edu ((Mark D. Manes), Norfolk State University) writes: >In article <t22918.665363459@ursa>, t22918@ursa (Matt Ranney ) writes: >> wrong, but when you only have a meg of mem, using up half of it just to >> DL some stuff in the background is kinda expensive. But you can't design >> a different version for every user out there, so I guess I'll just have to >> live with it (or buy more mem). >go ahead an add a few more features to JR-Comm. For example scripting and >a built in BBS emulator. I would love to see a editable review buffer as >well. We need a _Full_ featured terminal program. I grow tired of the >anemic terminal software that exists for the Amiga. I use Jr-Comm >almost exclusively unless I really need to do some kermit transfers. > Don't put in scripting! Put in an AREXX port! It should only add a few kbytes to the program ... that would solve the scripting and bbs emulator requests. An editable review buffer would be nice, too :) Wildstar (sorry about butchering the .sig files, but my site has a rule about replies - they get sent to dead.letter unless there is more new text than quoted text. All things considered, not a bad rule! :)
jra1@ra.MsState.Edu (Mephisto) (02/07/91)
>Ack! Matt buy a memory upgrade! >I am _tired_ of software being held back by the 512k whiners..... We are not all rich! I never noticed how much Jr-comm used up, but I would have before I scrimped (for years, it seems--I am a college student with very little income) and got some memory. Not to show my ignorance or anything, but why not make a program that can use external modules for these extra features. that way you wouldn't have to have a mammoth program, just one with the stuff you need. Kind of the same principles as the external protocols. jeff jra1@ra.msstate.edu
clemon@lemsys.UUCP (Craig Lemon) (02/09/91)
In a message posted on 7 Feb 91 00:28:46 GMT,
jra1@ra.MsState.Edu (Mephisto) wrote:
M>
M>
M>>Ack! Matt buy a memory upgrade!
M>>I am _tired_ of software being held back by the 512k whiners.....
M>
M>
M> We are not all rich! I never noticed how much Jr-comm used up, but
M> I would have before I scrimped (for years, it seems--I am a college student
M> with very little income) and got some memory.
M>
M> Not to show my ignorance or anything, but why not make a program that can
M> use external modules for these extra features. that way you wouldn't have
M> to have a mammoth program, just one with the stuff you need. Kind of the
M> same principles as the external protocols.
M>
M>jeff
M>jra1@ra.msstate.edu
Just a point I'd like to bring up. While we are on the topic of
memory and how much people have. I've noticed that Amiga Users seem to be
real whiners. REALLY! I mean there are still people around crying that
this new program won't work with their KS1.0 256K A1000! It seems to me
that in UN*X, IBM and MAC worlds, if a program requires 'x'-version DOS
and maybe even 2-4MB of memory, people accept that and let it be. It's a
big program with big requirements. All the rest of the world with >1 or
>1.5 MB shouldn't ALWAYS be limited by the 512K minority (counted from
serious users only, not gamers). When new Kickstarts are released and a
program requires the new Kickstart (like 1.3), people whine and groan that
they don't want to _bother_ upgrading and that all software should be
compatible right back to 1.0. How are we ever supposed to get ahead if we
can never use new OS features.
While I did get off the topic a little I feel that there should be
programs written with bigger requirements to do bigger things. We should
be able to use any memory we've purchased for something other than running
30 copies of a program meant to run in 512K. Because JR-Comm is a well
used program I suppose the only way around this is to split up into two
versions - Jr-Comm and Jr-Comm Jr. (yikes!). With only 512K JR Jr.
probably can't be enhanced _that_ much, only fixed (no offence in any way
Jack). It seems to me through observation etc... that the average real
Amiga user has about 1.5-2MB, with some ray-tracer people having 9MB and
other generic power users having about 5. There are of course _some_
"power" users stuck with a low budget but I believe that they would at
least have an A501 to give them 1MB.
This is, of course, a personal opinion. I feel that it's time for
some software vendors to break free of the 512K limit and just make the
requirements known. If a specialized program (ie. scientific, electronics
design) that someone really needs has slightly higher requirements,
they're just going to have to go and pay to obtain the requirements if
they require the power of that program. I would like to see more Jr. and Sr.
versions of more programs out there.
NOTE : I am not saying that there are NO 512K users out there. This is
apparent. But you 512K people also must realize that there is also a lot
of users with more to their systems that want to be able to use them. I
don't really want to get heavy-duty flamed for this. I'm not saying that
all software should ignore 512K or anything but with the present computer
situation, 512K can be VERY limiting to a piece of software. I feel that
in some cases this limit should be extended, allowing more powerful
features.
I also don't mean to offend anyone with this post. This post is
not a flame on anyone either. I probably chose some bad words somewhere
in here that don't suit the circumstances perfectly.
--
Craig Lemon - Kitchener, Ontario. Amiga B2000/10--2400 bps--AmigaUUCP 1.03D
clemon@lemsys.UUCP or lemsys!clemon@xenitec.on.ca |
lsuc!xenitec!lemsys!clemon@cs.toronto.edu | Choose your path.
....!{uunet}!watmath!xenitec!lemsys!clemon |